Letter: Justice in the dock: the fallibility of juries, self-defence, and trial by media

Sir: Your leading article today on the fallibility of juries is guilty of a serious error in asserting that 'it can safely be said only that this jury evidently was convinced that the defendant (acted in self defence)'. That is not so: all that can safely be said is that the jury was not convinced that he had not done so. The distinction is crucial and vital.

It is in fact likely that the jury was not convinced at all, and in dubiety rightly refused to convict. The defendant must always have the benefit of reasonable doubt.

Yours faithfully,

ROGER LAKE

York

15 July